Tens of thousands of blacks and Hispanics were surveyed, as were thousands of Asians.

Hillary Clinton, scolding, sexless schoolmarm, probably doesn't appeal much to high school guys. Grabbing HBs by the pussy, in contrast, likely does, so it's conceivable that these results stem in large part from the personalities of Trump and Clinton more than they do the wider worldviews associated with each side of the political divide. Cynically, Trump's antics appeal to adolescence while Hillary's cerebral affectations do not.

1. Asian boys narrowly preferred Trump over Hillary. Not great, and it doesn't make up for Asian girls, but it does show we can make inroads with Asian men.

What's funny is that Asian men have a lot to gain from HBD awareness and the alt-right's anti-miscegnation attitudes. White beta males have been hit hard by the Sexual Revolution, and in their hearts resent black men and Muslims getting or assaulting their women, but they still have enough white and Asian women around. White women are much less interested in Asian men than Asian women in white men, and Asian men are a minority, so they'd especially benefit from rigorous, principled anti-miscegnation attitudes.

2. Black boys supported Trump significantly more than black girls did. Again, not great, but it shows that Hillary didn't appeal to them personally.

3. White girls backed Trump over Hillary 2.5x. That's amazing.

I don't have a sense of what Generation Z girls are like, but that number would never be found among Millennial females.

The counterculture options are legion now. They weren't for millennials. Somehow I stumbled into Randall Parker's Parapundit my sophomore year back in 2005, from there found Steve Sailer, and the rest is history. Those were colonial times, when there were a few cities like Charleston and New York that had 5-figure populations. I happened to wash up on the shore of one of them.

Now the whole eastern seaboard is alight with cities, conurbation extending over the inland horizon. Every Gen Zer with any political awareness is familiar with people like Cernovich, Molyneux, Paul Joseph Watson, Milo, etc and as soon as they hit one of those nodes they become connected to all the others (I think Molyneux deserves special credit because he regularly funnels alt light types to the alt right). That network of dissidence simply didn't exist for millennials like it does for Zyklons.

Jim,

Here's to hoping genes grasp when their future is under threat!

Sid,

On the same day I dug into this I read about the Asian lawsuit against Harvard for racial discrimination--against Asians. Derb has championed an Ice People alliance for several years now.

Hillary Clinton as a person is about as unappealing to "youths" and "teens" as it gets.

I agree this breakdown gives the previous post more validity (ie, it smells a bit better). Still, a finding so dramatic makes me skeptical.

Can you breakdown by actual age (not group)? I would be interested in seeing trends within the millennial group. Younger millennials should be more pro Trump than older millennials.

Also any possible state by state analyses? A previous poster suggested MN showed a wide Trump favoritism for White Gen Zs. Would Whiter states show a greater White Trump favoritism? Does this mean that diversity diminishes White with-in group favoritism? This would go against many assumptions that people see to hold regarding proximity and diversity.

PS. I conducted a small household poll as I have two White teens (one boy and one girl). We live in a small town in the Midwest. I asked each of them, "In the mock at school election what percentage of your friends, do you think, voted for Trump?" Both of them answered, without hesitation, "All of them".

For what it's worth (a lot), the Left can never lose by pushing a presentable looking male candidate under 50. JFK, Obama, Macron, Trudeau etc. Put another 10-15 years on these guys, lower their cheekbones, and they'd be of no electoral use.

As long as women can vote, we're going to have to reckon with women voting with their loins. Sailer betrayed his naivete when he talked about Romney's looks; Romney looked great for his age, but he looked geriatric compared to Obama. My 50 year old boss liked Rubio, and she's been married for 25 years with 5 kids. Rubio was the most attractive of the 2016 candidates and is a few years shy of 50.

We've long known that women often come to think of the government as their partner, but their voting patterns can have even more disquieting motivations than that.

Some zealous middle-aged feminist women may have been excited about Hillary for ideological/ID politics reasons. At least that's based on some kind of reasoning and conscientiousness; nobody wants to sleep with Hillary, hell, the further past 50 somebody gets the harder it is to sell their attractiveness. That goes for 70 year old Trump, too.

Banning women from voting, unless perhaps they're married, would stop a lot of foolishness. Males do more research and are of course less swayed by out of control sentiment. By the time I was 15, I was reading alternative online media about the 2000 election, finding out that both parties were shitty albeit for different reasons. Of course there are female outliers, but I was shocked to find that a reasonably engaged women like my boss apparently has done no real digging into the candidates and issues (had she, she would've known about the gang of 8 bill that tainted Rubio).

The Rock would be nightmare candidate for our purposes. He'd be just under 50, clean background, lighter-skinned "minority", charismatic, etc.

We can't fail to recognize what made Trump's victory possible: Hillary spectacularly served as an out of touch contrast to her competitor. Had the Dems nominated a more inspiring candidate, the race would've been much closer.

Brexit is sometimes lumped in with Trump, not without reason but with Brexit people weren't really voting for anyone, if that makes sense. People were voting to either stop or continue an idea and a political arrangement. If only we always got to vote on a specific policy.

"The counterculture options are legion now. They weren't for millennials. Somehow I stumbled into Randall Parker's Parapundit my sophomore year back in 2005, from there found Steve Sailer, and the rest is history."

I somehow stumbled upon Cochran and Harpending's paper on Ashkenazi intelligence back in 2005 when I was a high school student. Needless to say, college indoctrination had no effect on me. If anything, as the propaganda came down, I could see the rhetorical sophistries the overlords were using.

More broadly, college used to be a very fun place for men. You got to drink and party, enjoy camaraderie with smart guys your age, and be around girls in their physical prime. In return, you had to imbibe or at least tolerate leftist propaganda, but that was a nice bargain.

The usual university is now less like a trip to Cancun and more like the Yan'an Rectification Movement. The atmosphere is intellectually stifling and personally isolating, and SJWs run campus rape campaigns knowing full well they will be ruining the lives of innocent men pour encourager les autres. If you want to bang cute girls, well, it's probably a better idea to hit on the girl who works at a kiosk in a mall with a high school diploma than a feminist who makes it a point to look at repulsive as possible.

Millennial men went to college with the wrong expectations, and a lot of alt-right Millennial men readily show buyer's remorse. Generation Z girls may be corrupted the way Millennial women were, but I'm sure the Generation Z males who will become college freshmen in a month aren't going to find much in college that will change their minds if they're tweeting out Pepe memes right now.

Is there a deferential thing, going on here with Z? A lot of Boomers, X-ers, and Millennials weren't willing to defer to either Hillary or Trump. The Boomers remain a contentious and divisive lot. It (used?) to be said that Millennials would be a good servant generation, but perhaps X-ers and Millennials alike have reached a point of weariness and frustration with the Boomers.

Gen Z mostly has Gen X (and even early Millennial) parents, not domineering Boomers. Perhaps blasé X-ers raised a still developing generation more willing to listen to and even admire older generations. Even the arrogant Boomers.

Put another way: big brash Trump is a fun novelty to kids, whereas to late X-ers and Millenials, he's just another loudmouth.

"More broadly, college used to be a very fun place for men. You got to drink and party, enjoy camaraderie with smart guys your age, and be around girls in their physical prime. In return, you had to imbibe or at least tolerate leftist propaganda, but that was a nice bargain.

The usual university is now less like a trip to Cancun and more like the Yan'an Rectification Movement"

This very much is related to the theory (developed in our sphere, if not elsewhere)that we go through periods of political hysteria that take 5-10 years to get out of our system. After which relative calm emerges for the next 10-15 years, until we get infected all over again.

Those who are in college during one of the periodic freak-outs seem to end up having a stick up their butts their whole lives. Perhaps Gen Z-ers are anxious to not be associated with annoying later Millennials who went to college in the Obama era.

The skepticism is healthy. I don't see any obvious advantages to be gained by an organization like Hispanic Heritage pumping Trump in this way, though. Large samples do not, of course, necessarily mean scientific samples, but ceteris paribus more is always better.

The only age breakdown available is among (some) Gen Zers who are 18+ relative to the rest, as the results allow users to look at people who actually voted. Since the survey was exclusively done in high schools, though, it's a small number, roughly 5%. For millennials, I don't have any source other than R-I, which lumps 18-29 year-olds into a single category.

In 2018 when the next round of the GSS comes out we'll be able to look at narrower age ranges.

Three cheers for your kids, by the way!

Feryl,

Glad to see you bring up physical attractiveness with regards to female voters. At a bare minimum of 35, physical attractiveness isn't that big of an influencer for male voters because the number of women who can stop people in their tracks at that age is near zero. In reality, with the late forties being considered "young" for a presidential candidate, it's almost a non-issue. I guess Sarah Palin was close--I remember my dad saying she was cute--but that's at most influencing at the margins. Men in their late forties, though, can be sexually attractive.

Sid,

I have several guys who work for me who are in college and the gym culture seems to be their refuge, especially the guys who aren't stencil-necked SJWs (which fortunately for me is almost all of them).

I don't remember that being the case even a decade ago when I graduated (and I used the gym regularly). There aren't many places where it's fun to be a red-blooded 20-something male on college campuses these days.

I agree with your timeline of calm periods and chaotic ones. I will add, though, that the first histrionic periods (1964-1973) took place at an outgoing period of time, rather than an outgoing one. As such, while the leftists were deranged, their women at least made it a point to put out for men.

The second histrionic period (1988-1994) took place around the time America went from having an outgoing culture to a cocooning one. As such, I bet the women caught up in those things were insufferable, and varied between hot and cold on the matter of sex.

The current and ongoing histrionic period has no upsides for men ages 18-22. SJWs make it a point for young women to look as ugly and repulsive as possible. Their attitudes towards sex are dangerously schizophrenic and hypocritical: they encourage women to slut it up, but want as many men as possible to be punished for campus rape. Above all, Millennial feminist women have no feminine essence. There's nothing sweet or alluring about them. They're just ugly androgynes.

If you're a Gen Z about to enter college or a Gen Y who is just about done with school, there's no appealing bargain. In the past, hedonism at least offset leftism, but not anymore.

My casual observation is that Gen X ranges from cynically indifferent (My end) to mildly hostile (Late X'ers) to Boomer politics. Millennials ranged from slavishly imitative to more slavishly imitative of Boomer politics. This seems to be changing, but Millennials still seem to be in a fog. Maybe the ADHD meds are the answer there. Gen Z is looking very hostile to Boomer politics and increasingly so.

I think it may be better to frame this in terms of Boomer politics because those old labels of right and left, conservative and liberal, don't fit very well today. That and the coming political turmoil is almost exclusively among whites. No one cares what blacks think and Hispanics are happy to follow the lead of whites.

I'll work the numbers in more detail in future posts, but it looks like this suggests that white "Bernie Bros (and Sisters)" roughly split at something approaching 50/50 between Trump and Clinton once Sanders was out. That's huge. We thought we'd see more of it from older generations, but they're probably more stuck in the partisan-loyalty trap than teenagers are.

Anon,

That's because the poll sampled total population, not just those who said they'd vote. If other preference polls were conducted that way, we'd regularly get results showing 28% for Clinton, 24% for Trump, 1% for third parties, etc. I'm only looking at people who indicated they'd vote and further only at those who would vote for a major party candidate.

Z,

That dovetails beautifully with the poll results from the primaries that an anonymous commenter shared. If Sanders' supporters are going in every possible direction once he's out, the old left-right paradigm is on borrowed time.

I am close friends with three Bernie Bros. The one who is 100% Jewish unenthusiastically went with Hillary because he thought Trump was racist (and before we make fun of him, he's about as red pilled as you can get in his social circle).

My half-Jewish friend also went with Hillary, but conceded to me that the SJ left really is racist against white people and loves making fun of SJWs. He just thought Trump was too buffoonish and thinks minorities will reach educational and economic parity with whites sometime soon.

My Italian-American friend, however, came to support Trump fully. He hates the deep state and absolutely loathes demographic replacement. He's mentioned Stefan Molyneux to me, so I think he's somewhere between alt-lite and alt-right.

I think that's a telling microcosm. White Bernie supporters who are Core Americans were more inclined to go with Trump because he reflected their populist, anti-establishment hopes. Bernie supporters closer to the Coalition of the Fringes found Trump's America First nationalism to be scary, even if they were glum about having to support a she-oligarch who hid her greed behind SJW rhetoric.

I watched the show "Comrade Detective" over the last two days on Amazon Video. The show is set in 1980s Romania and it's a spoof on Communist propaganda within the Iron Curtain. It makes fun of how absurd anti-American propaganda was during that time. Granted, some of the show spoofs anti-Red propaganda in America, but 80-90% of the show makes fun of Commie propaganda and self-imaging, and indirectly hits hipsters who "ironically" like Communism.

The show is brand new, and television reflects and shapes the current zeitgeist far more expeditiously than film does now. The center-left increasingly sees the Commies as being utterly deplorable.

"My casual observation is that Gen X ranges from cynically indifferent (My end) to mildly hostile (Late X'ers) to Boomer politics. Millennials ranged from slavishly imitative to more slavishly imitative of Boomer politics. This seems to be changing, but Millennials still seem to be in a fog. Maybe the ADHD meds are the answer there. Gen Z is looking very hostile to Boomer politics and increasingly so."

In terms of sentiment towards the election's Boomer avatars (mainly Trump and Clinton, Cruz/Rubio are X-ers, nobody cared about Jeb, and Sanders is a Silent), Millennials of all races were noticeably unenthused by the election after Sanders was bumped off.

Millennials and Gen Z are aware of how bleak the present and future seem to be. Neither likes the legacy families of either party (Bush, Clinton) and the complacency the establishment represents. I think at this point that a lot of Millennials are fed up with Boomer antics. They grew up in the 80's, 90's, and 2000's when most adults were impetuous Boomers. They were kids or nearing birth when we got our first Boomer president, Clinton, who naturally seemed to represent his generation perfectly (likably unlikable, first president to acknowledge using hallucinogenic drugs, amorous, absurdly entitled). Then we got Bush (aka chimpy and shrub), a frat boy in chief who didn't question being the face of numerous horrible economic and foreign policies. Onto Obama, whose race and relative youth gave him an advantage at appealing to younger people, yet eventually whatever respect he's now given will fade with time, being that he did so little (another known drug user president, btw).

Post-LBJ, 3 out 4 elected GOP presidents have been severely lacking in presentation. It's not so much that I or that many other people care per se, it's more that such a lacking presentation makes it a helluva lot easier to wage propaganda campaigns against them.

Nixon: Policy rating: mixedStrategy rating: low (great job trying to cover up Watergate, you took the bait)Personality and Presentation: lowEase of demonizing and impeaching: high

Policy wise, Trump's got a lot of appeal to the masses if he's allowed to make good on his initial platform. But he's got to figure out the right strategy to get things done. It's going to take a lot to reverse the baked-in dislike of the Trump brand. As much as we bitch about the media (rightfully so, I'm not sure there's an American precedent for so much hostility to a prospective and duly elected president), if Trump had the savvy and effortless gravitas of Reagan, there's no way in hell people would buy the propaganda like they do.

Remember too that Nixon sealed his fate by being obstinate and paranoid. My dad tried to tell me that there's consequences to being president and being an asshole, and now I'm starting to grasp what he meant. He was a teenager during Nixon's impeachment, and the 70's soured a lot of kids on politics (Nixon was an ass, and Carter was a wimp).

Perhaps naively, that's what I hope for, too. As long as what Derb terms "the cold civil war" between goodwhites and badwhites goes on, though, it's unlikely since Ashkenazi Jews are uber goodwhites.

Feryl,

As long as Trump doesn't perjure himself, he's not going to be kicked out of office. Unlike Nixon, Trump has a base of about one-third of the electorate that has his back and the media utterly lacks the credibility to change that. Woe to any congress critters in purple districts who try to cross them, especially Republicans. Trump has deftly been doing these huge, raucous rallies with some regularity since his election. See those rapturous hordes? They have pitchforks.

Yeah this shows that multiracialism leads to nothing but disaster. The White kids are seeing up close what a farce this has become. Foreigners with no love or stake in their homeland. Those blacks are multigeneration and still not American. Why? American is White pal. The model minorities also have no team spirit cause they're not you and don't ever want to be. Race is their identity. Whites better snap out of it. This is a lie, a Big Lie.You don't "share" your territory. Animals that lose their territory go extinct. You don't even have to be murdered. If you lose control of living space you are enslaved or at the mercy of your lessers. Make no mistake, they will never be kind to you.

Since discourse coarsened in the late 60's, the Left has gotten more aggressive at caricaturing conservatives to further diminish their credibility (and as i noted above, the GOP itself did a lot of the damage).

Nixon was unctuous and scheming (though certainly not dumb), according to the Left. Maybe, maybe not at first, but the CIA set him up and he played right into it. I don't doubt that the Roger Stones out there have warned Trump that he can't blow what credibility he has by going the full Nixon.

Reagan was an empty suit, a "bad actor" (I swear I once read a liberal use that insult) who was clueless about everything. The 1980 election was considered a downer at the time, with 3rd party candidates doing pretty well, Jimmy Carter nearly not seeking another term, and a bitter fight for the GOP nom. between Reagan and Bush 1. Reagan, Bush, and Carter traded some fairly tough jabs. Reagan wins it all, but struggles to gain traction in the early stages though his surviving a shooting provided a boost (Reagan's shooting, coming close after John Lennon's shocking death, was one those things that made people anxious to leave the counter-culture era behind). The national mood slowly brightened over Reagan's first term, and his approval rose in tandem until his presidency hit it's first big scandal with Iran-Contra. But since nobody ever really tried to push the meme that Reagan was venal or arrogant, most people accepted the idea that Reagan had no involvement and no real impeachment movement took off.

The left and eventually much of the right came to hate G.W. Bush, for obvious reasons. After the wars dragged on for 4-5 years, a decent impeachment movement came about that if memory serves did get to a formal stage.

As for Trump having an impregnable base that won't let Trump be dislodged, well, give it time. If the Dems stop being so retarded, and 86 the Clintonite evil spirits haunting their party, they can get back some credibility. Which is what Trump stands to lose if the neo-cons bully him into foreign misadventures, and also if the economy (which yeah, is already a mess going by real stats, not the government's BS) pops as it tends to do under Republicans due to bubbles inflated under Dems. Trump needs to toss out the Deep State Celtic brawler contingent (Mattis, Kelly, McMaster) so we can have a shot at reversing 70 years of counter-productive alliances/betrayals/wars. Not reining in the Pentagon would render his presidency a failure, in my opinion and there's others who feel like that too.

Lastly, as we saw with JFK and Reagan, the Deep State can and will resort to just shooting a president if they don't have the time to convince the public that the current president is a bad guy.

Perhaps naively, that's what I hope for, too. As long as what Derb terms "the cold civil war" between goodwhites and badwhites goes on, though, it's unlikely since Ashkenazi Jews are uber goodwhites.

I'm with you. I know a fair number of conservative Jews who are right here with us on the important issues. They are especially hard on liberal Jews for picking the wrong side. But, the numbers say they are a minority within the Jewish American population. Still, Jews seem to be having the same sorts of debates we see among whites in general. Jews are smart and attitudes can change quickly.

That's why I don't spend a lot of time worrying about who is white. That will sort itself in time. It will not be neat and tidy at the edges anyway. What matters now is making this thing positive and attractive. Get people moving our way and even the virtue signalling good whites will start to reconsider.

This has happened to me on twitter. A very liberal woman will engage me and at first I think it is a setup, but then I see that she is hate-curious. There's probably more of that than we know so our job is to do this as best we can.

I expect the divisions between goodwhite and badwhite Jews will grow more stark. Goodwhite Jews command far more money, power, and influence than badwhite ones. The goodwhite Jews who preface every message with, "As the descendant of refugees..." are incorrigible. There's no way we'll ever persuade them not to hate us, and they're going to clench the megaphone for the rest of their lives.

That said, Netanyahu and most Israelis are badwhite Jews. Netanyahu even took Orban's side over Soros. If you identify with Israel and have studied its politics and history, the idea of accepting millions of Muslims from countries which hate Israel sounds insane. France is becoming less of a livable country for Jews, for example. Furthermore, I can't imagine social justice campaigns are going to be fun for Generation Z Jews when they have to share bandwidth with BDSers.

SJWism is a luxury that is only viable in an affluent society without any real immediate existential threats. The decline it helps create will be what ultimately destroys it.

Feryl,

Trump seemed to be aware of the easy-money stock market bubble during the campaign, but now he's using whatever he can to prop himself up. A correction is coming, and I'd put the odds at better-than-not of starting during his first term. That's something the Dems will run against him on, though, not something that'll trigger impeachment.

Z,

That's why I make an effort to always keep my virtual composure. It's not just that we're trying to prod the publicly hate-curious (great term btw!) in our direction, we're also aiming at the fence-sitting observers of which there are always more than we realize.

Trump would be better off warning people of what's to come, and labeling the responsible parties in advance to better make a case that gubmint bureaucracy, corporate America, and the globalists have had no interest in stopping the anal rape of non-elites.

I've got a slight hunch that they're hoping to stave off the worst until at least the mid-terms have past, and ideally until after Trump's been re-elected.

Thing is, both parties have been cynically playing this game since the later 70's, as they try and suck up to the biggest lobbies instead of holding them accountable for greed, fraud, and incompetence. You try some stop-gap measure to boost the economy (heavy de-regulation, low interest rates, privatization, mergers) then hang on for dear life and hope to convince the lion's share of people that it's the other party (and that party's respective interest groups) who blew the sucker up after that measure is proven ineffective at lifting the lower classes up for the long-haul.

Lifting workers up via anti-trust enforcement, foreign goods tariffs, pro-private union policies, immigration restriction, higher interest rates to boost savings and discourage reckless spending, and less PC employment policies is what need after 40 years of goosing corporate profits and the fortunes of a handful of stock market gurus.

Trump either has gotten too timid to promote most of this, or he's been browbeaten/cajoled into adopting Post-Carter GOP econ. "wisdom". Again, every day that goes by this ideology grows more irrelevant and has already disgusted the Rust-belt for decades.

Alternatively, Trump could (on purpose?) let the same old same old eventually cause another crash, at which point he could avenge the forgotten American by throwing out Cohn/Mnuchin et al, and going on a very public campaign to arrest and convict the biggest corporate con-men, while also reforming America's broken bureaucracies which long ago descended into self-serving careerism.

There's plenty of instances of him on record "predicting" the bubble popping. If he has to talk out of both sides of his mouth to make the latter thing happen, more power to him. While he has been celebrating the stock market rally, he'll "stand out" more post-bubble for his dire predictions from 2016 of what was going to happen so he may be able to pull it off.

There's a conspiracy theory that the energy industry rigs oil prices around election season to benefit the GOP (which overwhelming is preferred by the fossil fuel lobby). Prices were fairly high in 1980 to help knock out the Dems, and prices conveniently fell in 2004 to help out Bush.

We can't overlook the possibility that Jew York City tries to crash the economy before either the mid-terms or before the next general election. But then again, greed being what it is perhaps they're just going to keep inflating the sucker, like a dog tick that doesn't know when to quit after it's been unmolested for weeks.

I'm a Gen Zer. 20 years old. Everyone I know fucking hates and recognizes the "college brainwashing." The propaganda does seem to be MUCH more effective on women my age then men. Its a stark contrast. Men see it and go "this fucking shit again? Fuck off." Some men do fall in the propaganda trap, but its a minority from what I've seen. Most just pretend to go along with it as to not get on professors' bad lists, getting "socially lynched" or even expelled. Its extremely stressful to keep up with on top of the already enormous stress of college itself.

It it's true that; "If a man isn't a liberal when he's twenty he doesn't have a heart. If he's not a conservative when he's forty he doesn't have a head" At 40 I suppose Gen Z will turn into something to the right of Atila the Hun?

"We can't fail to recognize what made Trump's victory possible: Hillary spectacularly served as an out of touch contrast to her competitor. Had the Dems nominated a more inspiring candidate, the race would've been much closer."

"And I'm certain that the Gen Z males will be definitively enjoying college--drinking, partying, getting laid. This experience hasn't all changed that much within the last 10, 20, or 30 years."

If you're an athlete at State U, yes, college is still very fun.

If you're an otherwise average guy with a high IQ, though, college is becoming ever more oppressive and less enjoyable. The whoring and boozing happens but the SJWs are setting up tribunals to ruin innocent men in the campus rape hysteria. You have to carefully phrase every comment to make sure no microaggressions can be found in what you say. The intellectual atmosphere is stultified and narrow. Heck, a lot of the girls there don't shave their underarms and sport fashy haircuts. It's disgusting. Again, it's less like a trip to Cancun and more like being in the midst of the Yan'an Rectification Movement.

In the past, there was a bargain: if you accept or even quietly tolerate leftism on campus, you get to have fun partying. That bargain is in place in a lot of places, but college is increasingly an expensive, disappointing experience for white men. You can see a fair number of alt-right Millennials who took the red pill when they were fed up with the nonsense on their college campus.

"If you're an otherwise average guy with a high IQ, though, college is becoming ever more oppressive and less enjoyable."

Actually, for average high IQ guys, college more than ever is less oppressive and more enjoyable.

"The whoring and boozing happens but the SJWs are setting up tribunals to ruin innocent men in the campus rape hysteria. You have to carefully phrase every comment to make sure no microaggressions can be found in what you say."

Pro tip --> Don't date crazy. Guys with game are able to snuff that out in a heartbeat.

"The intellectual atmosphere is stultified and narrow."

Maybe some of the classes, but not the debates with your friends and adversaries in bars and coffee houses.

In the past, there was a bargain: if you accept or even quietly tolerate leftism on campus, you get to have fun partying. That bargain is in place in a lot of places, but college is increasingly an expensive, disappointing experience for white men. You can see a fair number of alt-right Millennials who took the red pill when they were fed up with the nonsense on their college campus.

This is great news, but keep in mind just how small Gen Z is. It is dwarfed by Millenials. It is encouraging to the extent that it shows that Establishment brainwashing is provoking something of a reaction, and that the future may, indeed, belong to us. However, as far as the ballot box, Gen Z is not the answer.